Board 8 > Final Fantasy II and Final Fantasy III

(+) Yeah! (+)

I would argue FFIII had more of a story than FFII honestly.

--
http://i498.photobucket.com/albums/rr345/Rakaputra/pjbasis.png
SuperNiceDog - 1, pjbasis - 0

I played a bit of FFIII back in the early days emu's, and I thought it was not too bad. (I had played through 4 and 5 a little before this). I haven't went back to the original version since. Now FFIIIDS, gawd I went out and bought that first day. I was stoked for it. Needless to say I ended up trading it because something just didn't feel right with that version (I got pretty far into it, but only because I forced myself to play it and get my $40 worth). FFIVDS was great, though.

And yeah, gotta appreciate FFIII at least for giving us a interchangeable job system and summons i guess.

--
http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/7659/shee.jpg
http://myanimelist.net/animelist/Ex2

You're essentially saying that 2 is superior to 3 in large part because 2's plot matches up better to FUTURE Final Fantasy standards, and to me that's incredibly unfair. 3 did not suddenly "get worse" because the series changed directions later on.

Uh, I didn't say that? The direction of future FF games has nothing to do with this. What YOU'RE saying is that because the other NES games have no plot, I shouldn't take FF2 having one into account, and THAT is stupid.

I'm pretty sure the evil emperor ends up as a villain more often than his lieutenant does. Certainly the standing example of the evil empire trope when FF2 came out was Star Wars, and well...

Sure, I should have specified that I meant in Final Fantasy. Kefka, Sephiroth, Edea, Kuja... basically they went on a whole streak of this trope later on.

And complaining that the countries in the game aren't properly developed is... pretty asinine considering this is a NES game. Of course the plot is barely 2 pages of a book, and the characters paper thin. Nobody is arguing that FF2 is better than any of the post-NES games(except X-2), but compared to its contemporaries it's freaking Shakespeare.

It's pretty clear that those voting against FFIII have only played the (admittedly garbage) 3DS version, and aren't judging the original on its own merits. By the standards of the time, it's absolutely fantastic, and still holds up well to this very day. Huge worlds to explore, a compelling 8-bit plot that isn't bogged down by melodrama a la FFII, a terrific score, and most importantly the gameplay was actually good!

FFIII and FFV are far-and-away the two best in the series, in my mind. FFII just blows.

--
et tu, Joey Crawford?
http://i.imgur.com/HuR88.gif

And complaining that the countries in the game aren't properly developed is... pretty asinine considering this is a NES game. Of course the plot is barely 2 pages of a book, and the characters paper thin. Nobody is arguing that FF2 is better than any of the post-NES games(except X-2), but compared to its contemporaries it's freaking Shakespeare.

I couldn't disagree with this any more. If you're making a game plot-heavy, and that plot happens to completely suck, then it's better not to have a plot at all. What would you rather have, a game with no music or a game which plays NES Winter Games songs?

--
et tu, Joey Crawford?
http://i.imgur.com/HuR88.gif

eh, since I made this topic, I'd better post my ranking of the main FF games:

1. Final Fantasy VII
2. Final Fantasy X
3. Final Fantasy IV
4. Final Fantasy IX
5 Final Fantasy VIII
6. Final Fantasy V
7. Final Fantasy VI (oh noes)
8. Final Fantasy
9. Final Fantasy XII
10. Final Fantasy XIII i guess for now
11. Final Fantasy XI
12. Final Fantasy II
13. Final Fantasy III(DS)

haven't tried XIV yet.

--
http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/7659/shee.jpg
http://myanimelist.net/animelist/Ex2

ITT: People confuse FFIII and FFVI

--
lol

From: Takfloyd_mkII__ | #053
Uh, I didn't say that? The direction of future FF games has nothing to do with this.

From: Takfloyd_mkII__ | #043
I wouldn't call it outright bad... but it kind of has no story. That's a pretty big deal in a Final Fantasy game.

I find no way to really reconcile these two statements.

--
Thank you, Eddie Guerrero.
http://www.wwe.com/f/styles/photo_large/public/photo/image/2012/04/33_Moscow_04112012jg_02128.jpg

I'm still a tad confused as to what makes FFIII NES miles ahead of FFIII DS though, apart from the DS aesthetics being pretty bad.

--
"Later..." <Toonami> <4/1/2012> <Never Forget> ~SCP~
http://img.imgcake.com/Jeffzeropngus.png

Do you like FFV?

If you do, you'll probably like 8-bit FFIII. It's a little more "Nintendo Hard" and a little less balanced, but the job system is still pretty fun.

--
Thank you, Eddie Guerrero.
http://www.wwe.com/f/styles/photo_large/public/photo/image/2012/04/33_Moscow_04112012jg_02128.jpg

From: Jakyl25 | #060
Do you like FFV?

If you do, you'll probably like 8-bit FFIII. It's a little more "Nintendo Hard" and a little less balanced, but the job system is still pretty fun.

I love FFV. I was kind of iffy on FFIII but I only played the DS version. pj was telling me I ought to play the NES version instead though, as if it's that much different. But yeah, admittedly the aesthetics for the DS remake of III really threw me off.

--
"Later..." <Toonami> <4/1/2012> <Never Forget> ~SCP~
http://img.imgcake.com/Jeffzeropngus.png

Everything just feels better man.

It goes faster in every respect for one, which can be a huge deal, ask anyone who played the SNES games on the PS1.

The DS also only allowed up to 3 enemies on the screen at once as opposed to the 9 on NES, so lots of things get screwed up in the process, like enemies getting multiple hits per turn.

--
http://i498.photobucket.com/albums/rr345/Rakaputra/pjbasis.png
SuperNiceDog - 1, pjbasis - 0

What's wrong with the DS version of FFIII? I haven't played either version but I'm thinking I might pick it up at some point (because job system and cute sprites).

edit: five-minute ninja 'whoops'


--
another place and time, without a great divide, and we could be flying deadly high

There aren't any sprites in IIIDS.

--
http://i498.photobucket.com/albums/rr345/Rakaputra/pjbasis.png
SuperNiceDog - 1, pjbasis - 0

Oh yeah, the three-enemies-max thing felt really weird.

--
"Later..." <Toonami> <4/1/2012> <Never Forget> ~SCP~
http://img.imgcake.com/Jeffzeropngus.png

FF1's story is better than FF2's.

Yeah, that single bit of dialogue at the end where the final boss explains his grand plot is pretty much it there, but it single handedly beats anything FF2 throws at you.

--
No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

Lopen posted...
FF1's story is better than FF2's.

Yeah, that single bit of dialogue at the end where the final boss explains his grand plot is pretty much it there, but it single handedly beats anything FF2 throws at you.

I... agree.

--
"Later..." <Toonami> <4/1/2012> <Never Forget> ~SCP~
http://img.imgcake.com/Jeffzeropngus.png

Heh, FFI does have a neat story with the limited techniques it has to use.

That part in the Flying Fortress where you look at the world map below and see the energy from the other three dungeons congregate at the Chaos Shrine?

Awesome foreshadowing.

--
http://i498.photobucket.com/albums/rr345/Rakaputra/pjbasis.png
SuperNiceDog - 1, pjbasis - 0

VIII.

--
Blitzball fan? Try Captain Tsubasa II (in English) for NES!
Game reviews/articles by me: http://betweenlifeandgames.com

Lopen posted...
FF1's story is better than FF2's.

Yeah, that single bit of dialogue at the end where the final boss explains his grand plot is pretty much it there, but it single handedly beats anything FF2 throws at you.

Yep, this is true!

To this day I still don't understand what the plot of the first Final Fantasy game really was or how it makes sense. I've never heard a good answer either, but at least it's unique and thought-provoking.

--
et tu, Joey Crawford?
http://i.imgur.com/HuR88.gif

*FINAL FANTASY SPOILERS LOL*








I mean the time loop is easy enough to understand.

Chaos creates the Four Fiends who also create Chaos from Garland (killed by the Light Warriors) 1000 years in the past.

The problem comes from the fact that the game tells you that you broke the cycle after the final battle, even though everything else implies the cycle goes on forever (Light Warriors lose memories and are in location at the beginning of the game, Chaos curiously absent in the present time).








*END SPOILERS*

--
http://i498.photobucket.com/albums/rr345/Rakaputra/pjbasis.png
SuperNiceDog - 1, pjbasis - 0

IV question.

Preference: DS or PSP?

--
"Later..." <Toonami> <4/1/2012> <Never Forget> ~SCP~
http://img.imgcake.com/Jeffzeropngus.png

DS.

--
SEP Nash, Smelling Like the Vault since 1996
Step FOUR! Get Paid! http://img.imgcake.com/stevenashgifpu.gif

*ROFL FFI SPOILERS*



The problem comes from the fact that the game tells you that you broke the cycle after the final battle, even though everything else implies the cycle goes on forever (Light Warriors lose memories and are in location at the beginning of the game, Chaos curiously absent in the present time).

This would be the big problem, no doubt. They set up the framework for a neat time-travel plot, then throw all consistency and logic out the window towards the end. I don't know, maybe the loop was broken because of generic "power of Hope" stuff a la FFVI?



*END SPOILERS*

--
et tu, Joey Crawford?
http://i.imgur.com/HuR88.gif

I've never really wanted to finish any of the first 3

I think the series really begins at 4

--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npHDxSvwCE0

There is no point in playing III because it's a poor man's V.

From: Jeff Zero | #072
IV question.

Preference: DS or PSP?

At the end of the day the DS version is the best game.

PSP is close to the original experience though. (Even though the DS seems to have the most accurate translation)

--
http://i498.photobucket.com/albums/rr345/Rakaputra/pjbasis.png
SuperNiceDog - 1, pjbasis - 0

someone in the know rank all the FF4 versions that have ever come out plz

--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npHDxSvwCE0

The people hating on 3 and praising 2 in this topic seriously confuse me. Was the DS remake that bad? How did they mess it up that bad? cause 3 was pretty fun on the NES and 2 is a complete mess full of pointless grind, unchallenging bosses, uneven difficulty curve (later in the game for a bit the monsters actually regress.) Also I think the party members the game gives you with the 4th slot outside of like the first couple are pretty much useless.

--
Whatever...

DS>GBA>PSP>PS1>SNES JP>SNES US

I can't rank the cellphone one.

--
Whatever...

From: SythaWarrior | #080
>PS1>SNES JP>

wut

You like loading times?

--
http://i498.photobucket.com/albums/rr345/Rakaputra/pjbasis.png
SuperNiceDog - 1, pjbasis - 0

I don't remember FFIV having bad loading times but Chrono Trigger made me super sad I remember.

--
Whatever...

Takfloyd_mkII__ posted...
I don't get all the hating on FF2. A real story, an awesome villain, a level-up system that, while flawed, was about twenty years ahead of its time, and on top of that you get to talk to beavers? What's not to like!

FF3 is the worst for sure.

Being unique is meaningless if it isn't good. The level up system was the main thing of the game, and it was heavily flawed. I don't care if the game was one hundred years ahead of its time if it isn't enjoyable then it's all for naught.


The main issues I have with FF2 is...


1. The map was too vague. It was impossible to tell the difference between a section that had the beginner enemies, and a section that had enemies that would party wipe you on round one. Heck, even at the very start of the game you can walk all the way down and end up fighting a bomb that WILL kill you, and you're right in front of the castle you start off at.

2. The player was punished for playing the game. You saw a bunch of doors in a dungeon. In 99% of RPGs, these doors mean something. You can find treasure in the room or progress at least. In FFII? Almost all of them are empty rooms that have a 99% encounter rate. Not exactly fun. Not only does this stifle exploration, it makes the dungeons overall boring. Most of the rooms look exactly the same. I can barely tell the difference between one dungeon and the next.

3. The stats system. It may have been "ahead of its time" but it was still messed up. You mostly had to either be a magicless warrior or a frail caster with no room in between if you wanted a good character. Also, this may have just been me, but why is it so difficult to run away from even weak encounters? It's just annoying when it takes a long time to run from a goblin.

4. Lack of useful abilities. FFII had a lot of spells and weapons, but only a few of them mattered. Fist were better than any weapon until about the final dungeon with a few exceptions. Spells were mostly either pointless, or took forever to get useful(Level 7 Esuna I believe before it FINALLY cures petrification?). The worst case example is Ultima. You go into a mini storyline and a dungeon to get to it. It's "the most powerful magic" and you "need" it to defeat the Emperor.

Except for the fact it starts at level 1 and you need to grind every other spell in the game before Ultima can actually be worth it. You can easily beat the game well before that happens.



Honestly, it seems that Quest 64 does FFII better than FFII does itself.

--
http://img.imgcake.com/AlecTrevylan006/darkyounglinkshieldpngyg.png
Sleep? F*** sleep, Toonami is on!!- GenesisSaga

PS1 FFIV actually does not have long loading times, except to load/save memory card data

--
SuperNiceDog is a vicious breed and should be banned from further Guru contests.

Seriously, you guys.



Mere minutes after the most tragic part of the game.

FF3 was not messed up that bad on the DS. Yeah the pacing of battles is slower but it's still faster than all the PS1 games so I don't see the big issue. The 3 enemy thing I didn't really mind.

In exchange for slightly slower story you get prettier graphics, actual characters, and a slightly better story out of the deal. So whatever.

--
No problem!
This is a cute and pop genocide of love!

someone in the know rank all the FF4 versions that have ever come out plz

PSP and DS are the only ones worth playing.

--
Geologists will date anything.

Lopen posted...
FF3 was not messed up that bad on the DS. Yeah the pacing of battles is slower but it's still faster than all the PS1 games so I don't see the big issue. The 3 enemy thing I didn't really mind.

In exchange for slightly slower story you get prettier graphics, actual characters, and a slightly better story out of the deal. So whatever.

I preferred the game without the story, since it's much more monotonous. That, and the main villain so bad that the Cloud of Darkness took his place in Dissidia.

--
Golden Sun isn't half-bad, but it needs to cut the crap with the Yes/No questions, which make Zubats look like thylacines in comparison.

3 NES was definitely the best of the 3 on it. But it did have some bullcrap to it.

--
Oh SuperNiceDog's doing it again dude.
SuperNiceDog, you ain't no pimp dude

people who don't like 3 only played the DS version

--
I'm no longer a Nadal supporter. Andy Murray is my new favorite player/person. -Princess Anri

And complaining that the countries in the game aren't properly developed is... pretty asinine considering this is a NES game. Of course the plot is barely 2 pages of a book, and the characters paper thin.

Exactly! In other words, FF2's plot, like that of most NES games, is pretty terrible and not worth playing a game for. So I'll pick the Final Fantasy with clearly better gameplay over FF2 any day, which FF1 and FF3 both have.

. The stats system. It may have been "ahead of its time" but it was still messed up. You mostly had to either be a magicless warrior or a frail caster with no room in between if you wanted a good character.

Actually I disagree pretty strongly here and think the best way to make a character is for them to be balanced: physicals because those deal the most damage most of the time, but magic to take out enemies with extremely high def and/or glaring elemental weaknesses (e.g. flans). But you can make more unbalanced characters if you want.

The only thing about FF2 character building you really need to know is that the evade stat, and hence levelling up your shields, is godlike. Not only do most enemies use evadable physicals (there are whole dungeons with nothing but, and many enemies do gravity damage so not even your HP matters), but it determines how quickly you act in battle. Yes, this pretty much makes bows a trap.

The rest of your points are completely spot on. Special bonus for how useless most spells were. You won't use Esuna often enough to get it to Level 3 over the course of the game (probably not even Level 2), so why does it have special effects at Level 7? To say nothing of how terrible status/effect magic is unless you sit there grinding it for hours. Berserk and maaybe Blink/Haste are the only ones even worth looking at.

--
The RPG Duelling League: www.rpgdl.com
An unparalleled source for RPG information and discussion

Oh well, I know I'm in the minority when it comes to FF2 so I won't bother trying to convince anyone, but I sure had a good time with it. I've only played the GBA version though, so if people here have only played the NES/PS1 version then we probably had a very different experience.

As for FF4, DS version is easily the best. PSP version is a broken mess of a port from the GBA version, which was also a broken mess.

I actually don't recall the differences between the versions of FF2 changing the game significantly. There's general polish improvements that all the games got, but nothing drastic.

Although I guess FF2 getting general polish improvements without completely wrecking the game's challenge (FF1 Dawn of Souls) or slowing the game down and imposing a three-enemy cap (FF3 DS) could be considered a victory for FF2 remakes!

--
The RPG Duelling League: www.rpgdl.com
An unparalleled source for RPG information and discussion

SythaWarrior posted...
DS>GBA>PSP>PS1>SNES JP>SNES US

I can't rank the cellphone one.

Hm, what makes GBA better than PSP? Aren't they the same thing?

--
"Later..." <Toonami> <4/1/2012> <Never Forget> ~SCP~
http://img.imgcake.com/Jeffzeropngus.png

Takfloyd_mkII__ posted...
Oh well, I know I'm in the minority when it comes to FF2 so I won't bother trying to convince anyone, but I sure had a good time with it. I've only played the GBA version though, so if people here have only played the NES/PS1 version then we probably had a very different experience.

As for FF4, DS version is easily the best. PSP version is a broken mess of a port from the GBA version, which was also a broken mess.

oh, just read this.

Well that's a shame. I prefer its look.

--
"Later..." <Toonami> <4/1/2012> <Never Forget> ~SCP~
http://img.imgcake.com/Jeffzeropngus.png

Best Tier:
7
5
11
9

Great Tier:
6
13
13-2
4
10
8

Good Tier:
3
1

Truly Bad Tier:
14
2
12
10-2

--
Not changing this sig until the Bengals, Bills, Browns and Lions win the Super Bowl (10/10/10)
The most American Canadian on Board 8 - #9 Bro on Board 8

^ decent list, although FF5 is a tier too high, 10-2 is a tier too low, and 6 and 10 belong at the top

--
Pride. Passion. Excellence. Metal_DK
Currently playing: Sengoku Rance, Starcraft II

Yeah, the PSP version looks so damn good, it's incredible how they were able to mess it up this much.

Example: In the PSP version, if you just spam attack with Cecil and Kain, you kill the Mist Dragon before it even transforms once... and it does 1 damage to you when it attacks. Did they even playtest this thing?

Also, they copypasta'd the GBA translation... but The After Years, which is included with the PSP version, uses the DS translation for the flashbacks, which is just really jarring.

To top it off you get some ill-advised 3D "cutscenes" that look like they're from the PS1.

Also rankings? Check out my totally awesome tiers:

Shinryu Tier
FFVII
FFX

Omega Tier
FFIX
FFVI

Gilgamesh Tier
FFIV
FFV

Ultros Tier
FFIV After Years
FFXIII-2
FFXII
FFVIII
FFXIII
FFVII Crisis Core
FFVII Dirge of Cerberus

Chocobo Tier
FFII
FFI
FFXII Revenant Wings
FFIII

^Everything here is decent

Excalipoor Tier
FFX-2